CDZ Why don't American, so called, "feminists" go after the hijab...an actual symbol of oppression....

[Dogmaphobe]

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing is not religious. It crosses all societies. It is particularly

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing crosses all religions and societies. Did you you know that? In fact it is particularly prevalent in India among the Hindu majority. Why do you give them a free pass and only attack Muslims for it?

Equally important....there are many ways in which misogynistic cultures can attack women...is the only one that matters acid throwing? Or is it that it is necessary to move the goalposts in order to make it possible to single out Islam as an entire faith rather than a collection of cultures some of whom have a lot in common with other misogynistic cultures? Think about it....

Here is some information on acid attacks that may surprise you....
Acid throwing - Wikipedia

Do Amish and Jewish people do it? Can’t find anything specific on Amish and acid but I can find other disturbing material typical related to the abuse of women in their societies.

Pennsylvania rape case of Amish girl 'gifted' to man
Survivor Speaks Out Against Amish Rape Culture Ahead Of Sentencing | HuffPost

And among the more conservative Jewish communities.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
In Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, abused women are finding a way out
Woman in Beit Shemesh attacked by ultra-Orthodox extremists
Mishmeret Tzniyut - Wikipedia

This leads to two questions...
If you call the hijab a symbol of oppression, why not the distinctive clothing of Amish women or the distinctive head scarves or orthodox Jewish women?

Why are those criticizing feminists for ignoring abuse in Muslim communities ignoring the same abuse in non Muslim communities?

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

Misogyny is hardwired into the very fabric of Islam, where Islamic jurisprudence treats women as lesser beings. There is just no getting around that no matter how many times you resort to these fallacious ruses in order to defend it.

The subject matter here is the way the left defends Islam despite its absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women. It is an important issue because it is so prevalent, and because there are a billion and a half Muslims. Sure, you can find small sects of others here and they by way of defending it, and you can find the behavior of people who are not motivated by religion, but the fact remains that women are considered lesser beings by Islam, as is in such copious evidence both through the behavior of Muslim men and the facts of Islamic law.

For whatever non liberal reason you have chosen, you simply defend Islam rather than critique it rationally.

It is not the lefts job to defend any religion
It is the Constitutions job

The left only stands up for Constitutional rights

If it isn't your job, then why do you do so freaking much of it?

 

[Coyote]

Let's keep the argument to here in this country - comparing the US or western countries to, say, Saudi Arabia is apples and oranges.

Women have the right to choose in this country. Some choose to wear traditional religious garb some don't.

Is it always a free choice? Depends. There can be tremendous pressure exerted by family and community to conform and that isn't limited to traditional Muslim families. The pressure can extend to domestic violence. Not conforming can mean violence or a total loss of family, community and friends. But you're wrong in thinking it's only or mostly among Muslims. Any of the strongly patriarchal religious societies that dictate a subservient role to women, that isolates them, can increase the chances that it can occur.

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
Sexual Abuse in the Amish Community
Biblical Battered Wife Syndrome: Christian Women and Domestic Violence
American Muslim Women and Domestic Violence

The last article is particularly interesting. It's on domestic violence (which is what much of this religious inspired violence on women for not submitting is) - that it is a problem for Muslim women. But it's not the hijab.

By and large though, women in our country do have that choice. So I would say - who are you to take that choice away from them?

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing is not religious. It crosses all societies. It is particularly

Let's keep the argument to here in this country - comparing the US or western countries to, say, Saudi Arabia is apples and oranges.

Women have the right to choose in this country. Some choose to wear traditional religious garb some don't.

Is it always a free choice? Depends. There can be tremendous pressure exerted by family and community to conform and that isn't limited to traditional Muslim families. The pressure can extend to domestic violence. Not conforming can mean violence or a total loss of family, community and friends. But you're wrong in thinking it's only or mostly among Muslims. Any of the strongly patriarchal religious societies that dictate a subservient role to women, that isolates them, can increase the chances that it can occur.

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
Sexual Abuse in the Amish Community
Biblical Battered Wife Syndrome: Christian Women and Domestic Violence
American Muslim Women and Domestic Violence

The last article is particularly interesting. It's on domestic violence (which is what much of this religious inspired violence on women for not submitting is) - that it is a problem for Muslim women. But it's not the hijab.

By and large though, women in our country do have that choice. So I would say - who are you to take that choice away from them?

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing crosses all religions and societies. Did you you know that? In fact it is particularly prevalent in India among the Hindu majority. Why do you give them a free pass and only attack Muslims for it?

Equally important....there are many ways in which misogynistic cultures can attack women...is the only one that matters acid throwing? Or is it that it is necessary to move the goalposts in order to make it possible to single out Islam as an entire faith rather than a collection of cultures some of whom have a lot in common with other misogynistic cultures? Think about it....

Here is some information on acid attacks that may surprise you....
Acid throwing - Wikipedia

Do Amish and Jewish people do it? Can’t find anything specific on Amish and acid but I can find other disturbing material typical related to the abuse of women in their societies.

Pennsylvania rape case of Amish girl 'gifted' to man
Survivor Speaks Out Against Amish Rape Culture Ahead Of Sentencing | HuffPost

And among the more conservative Jewish communities.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
In Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, abused women are finding a way out
Woman in Beit Shemesh attacked by ultra-Orthodox extremists
Mishmeret Tzniyut - Wikipedia

This leads to two questions...
If you call the hijab a symbol of oppression, why not the distinctive clothing of Amish women or the distinctive head scarves or orthodox Jewish women?

Why are those criticizing feminists for ignoring abuse in Muslim communities ignoring the same abuse in non Muslim communities?

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

I am well aware of Tu Quoque, and also how it can be abused. You want this to be only about Islam, yet you make claims that you imply are somehow atrociously unique to Islam, and when it's pointed out that no it isn't - you cry tu quoque.

Here is the problem with your argument. You want to say that the hijab is somehow a symbol of oppression of women. At the same time you saying special religious garb for women (even, in the case of covering hair - the SAME religious garb) in other religions that are also misogynistic at their core - are NOT oppressive.

If one argues that - you say Tu Quoque.




Misogyny is hardwired into the very fabric of Islam, where Islamic jurisprudence treats women as lesser beings. There is just no getting around that no matter how many times you resort to these fallacious ruses in order to defend it.

The subject matter here is the way the left defends Islam despite its absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women. It is an important issue because it is so prevalent, and because there are a billion and a half Muslims. Sure, you can find small sects of others here and they by way of defending it, and you can find the behavior of people who are not motivated by religion, but the fact remains that women are considered lesser beings by Islam, as is in such copious evidence both through the behavior of Muslim men and the facts of Islamic law.

For whatever non liberal reason you have chosen, you simply defend Islam rather than critique it rationally.[/QUOTE]

I have been critiquing

Let's keep the argument to here in this country - comparing the US or western countries to, say, Saudi Arabia is apples and oranges.

Women have the right to choose in this country. Some choose to wear traditional religious garb some don't.

Is it always a free choice? Depends. There can be tremendous pressure exerted by family and community to conform and that isn't limited to traditional Muslim families. The pressure can extend to domestic violence. Not conforming can mean violence or a total loss of family, community and friends. But you're wrong in thinking it's only or mostly among Muslims. Any of the strongly patriarchal religious societies that dictate a subservient role to women, that isolates them, can increase the chances that it can occur.

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
Sexual Abuse in the Amish Community
Biblical Battered Wife Syndrome: Christian Women and Domestic Violence
American Muslim Women and Domestic Violence

The last article is particularly interesting. It's on domestic violence (which is what much of this religious inspired violence on women for not submitting is) - that it is a problem for Muslim women. But it's not the hijab.

By and large though, women in our country do have that choice. So I would say - who are you to take that choice away from them?

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing is not religious. It crosses all societies. It is particularly

Let's keep the argument to here in this country - comparing the US or western countries to, say, Saudi Arabia is apples and oranges.

Women have the right to choose in this country. Some choose to wear traditional religious garb some don't.

Is it always a free choice? Depends. There can be tremendous pressure exerted by family and community to conform and that isn't limited to traditional Muslim families. The pressure can extend to domestic violence. Not conforming can mean violence or a total loss of family, community and friends. But you're wrong in thinking it's only or mostly among Muslims. Any of the strongly patriarchal religious societies that dictate a subservient role to women, that isolates them, can increase the chances that it can occur.

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
Sexual Abuse in the Amish Community
Biblical Battered Wife Syndrome: Christian Women and Domestic Violence
American Muslim Women and Domestic Violence

The last article is particularly interesting. It's on domestic violence (which is what much of this religious inspired violence on women for not submitting is) - that it is a problem for Muslim women. But it's not the hijab.

By and large though, women in our country do have that choice. So I would say - who are you to take that choice away from them?

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing crosses all religions and societies. Did you you know that? In fact it is particularly prevalent in India among the Hindu majority. Why do you give them a free pass and only attack Muslims for it?

Equally important....there are many ways in which misogynistic cultures can attack women...is the only one that matters acid throwing? Or is it that it is necessary to move the goalposts in order to make it possible to single out Islam as an entire faith rather than a collection of cultures some of whom have a lot in common with other misogynistic cultures? Think about it....

Here is some information on acid attacks that may surprise you....
Acid throwing - Wikipedia

Do Amish and Jewish people do it? Can’t find anything specific on Amish and acid but I can find other disturbing material typical related to the abuse of women in their societies.

Pennsylvania rape case of Amish girl 'gifted' to man
Survivor Speaks Out Against Amish Rape Culture Ahead Of Sentencing | HuffPost

And among the more conservative Jewish communities.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
In Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, abused women are finding a way out
Woman in Beit Shemesh attacked by ultra-Orthodox extremists
Mishmeret Tzniyut - Wikipedia

This leads to two questions...
If you call the hijab a symbol of oppression, why not the distinctive clothing of Amish women or the distinctive head scarves or orthodox Jewish women?

Why are those criticizing feminists for ignoring abuse in Muslim communities ignoring the same abuse in non Muslim communities?

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

I am well aware of "tu quoque" fallacy. I am also aware of how it can be used to shut down discussion.

For example, you are attempting to make the case that Islam - as a ENTIRE faith - is uniquely misogynistic - enough so that elements, such as the hijab should be considered oppression. I'm not sure about you but others who support your arguments have even called for it to be banned.

If someone points out that...no...it isn't "unique" by any means and that it is often CULTURE not religion that leads to these abuses - and takes each of your arguments apart, you claim "tu quoque".

If opposition to misogyny and the ending of cultural and religious practices that abuse women - why do people focus only on Islam? To the point where they take cultural practices in other countries and imply that Muslims in America are just as bad just as misogynistic.

I have yet to see a thread or post decrying excesses elsewhere yet they are there. In my opinion, people who TRULY care, who truly want to better things for women focus on it everywhere: they neither excuse it when it occurs in Islamic countries nor ignore it when it occurs in non-Islamic countries. Child marriages, forced marriages, lack of education for girls, acid attacks, rape, domestic abuse - these are HUGE problems. Whether it's occuring in Afghanistan where Muslim girls are shot for trying to get an education, or India where low caste women are routinely raped as a male "right" and recieve little to no justice or countries in Africa where women undergo FGM or are left alone in "menstral huts" to fend for themselves.

Where is the attention? I can tell you I've started threads on it...and little attention is paid unless it's Islamic.

Misogyny is hardwired into the very fabric of Islam, where Islamic jurisprudence treats women as lesser beings. There is just no getting around that no matter how many times you resort to these fallacious ruses in order to defend it.

Right here is a fallacy. It's called a "strawman" fallacy and you use it often. Are you familiar with it? It means, essentially, that you accuse your opponent of an argument they are not actually making.

Defending religious freedom is not defending misogyny.
Pointing out that these world religions VARY in how people choose to follow them is not defending misogyny.
It is providing facts and that seems to be problematic for some.

If misogyny is hardwired into Islam...then why is it so many Muslims in this country and around the world are not misogynists? Obviously there is a way around it. Jews figured it out. Christians figured it out. Hindus are working on it. So are Muslims.

The subject matter here is the way the left defends Islam despite its absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women. It is an important issue because it is so prevalent, and because there are a billion and a half Muslims. Sure, you can find small sects of others here and they by way of defending it, and you can find the behavior of people who are not motivated by religion, but the fact remains that women are considered lesser beings by Islam, as is in such copious evidence both through the behavior of Muslim men and the facts of Islamic law.

Point out ONE post where I or for that matter leftists in general have defended mistreatment of women?

Is defending the right of a woman to choose to wear a hijab defending an "absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women"...seriously?

For whatever non liberal reason you have chosen, you simply defend Islam rather than critique it rationally.

Nope I have no problem critiquing it. I've been critical of how extremists seek to prevent the education of girls, very critical of FGM, child marriages, domestic abuse.

But the difference between you and I is this - I don't restrict it to just Islam alone and I refuse to broad brush an entire world faith with the excesses of some - whether it's Islam, Judaism, Islam or Hinduism.

Who do you think is fighting to end FGM? Underage marriages? It's Muslims themselves.

For your reference:
Straw Man: This move oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument.

 

[Coyote]

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

By the way...I can find plenty of threads where someone is criticizing Christians someone pops in with "but Muslims"....for example your post here is an excellent example: Walmart shooter reportedly lived with stack of Bibles, no furniture. Why isn't he a terrorist?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing is not religious. It crosses all societies. It is particularly

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing crosses all religions and societies. Did you you know that? In fact it is particularly prevalent in India among the Hindu majority. Why do you give them a free pass and only attack Muslims for it?

Equally important....there are many ways in which misogynistic cultures can attack women...is the only one that matters acid throwing? Or is it that it is necessary to move the goalposts in order to make it possible to single out Islam as an entire faith rather than a collection of cultures some of whom have a lot in common with other misogynistic cultures? Think about it....

Here is some information on acid attacks that may surprise you....
Acid throwing - Wikipedia

Do Amish and Jewish people do it? Can’t find anything specific on Amish and acid but I can find other disturbing material typical related to the abuse of women in their societies.

Pennsylvania rape case of Amish girl 'gifted' to man
Survivor Speaks Out Against Amish Rape Culture Ahead Of Sentencing | HuffPost

And among the more conservative Jewish communities.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
In Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, abused women are finding a way out
Woman in Beit Shemesh attacked by ultra-Orthodox extremists
Mishmeret Tzniyut - Wikipedia

This leads to two questions...
If you call the hijab a symbol of oppression, why not the distinctive clothing of Amish women or the distinctive head scarves or orthodox Jewish women?

Why are those criticizing feminists for ignoring abuse in Muslim communities ignoring the same abuse in non Muslim communities?

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

I am well aware of Tu Quoque, and also how it can be abused. You want this to be only about Islam, yet you make claims that you imply are somehow atrociously unique to Islam, and when it's pointed out that no it isn't - you cry tu quoque.

Here is the problem with your argument. You want to say that the hijab is somehow a symbol of oppression of women. At the same time you saying special religious garb for women (even, in the case of covering hair - the SAME religious garb) in other religions that are also misogynistic at their core - are NOT oppressive.

If one argues that - you say Tu Quoque.




Misogyny is hardwired into the very fabric of Islam, where Islamic jurisprudence treats women as lesser beings. There is just no getting around that no matter how many times you resort to these fallacious ruses in order to defend it.

The subject matter here is the way the left defends Islam despite its absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women. It is an important issue because it is so prevalent, and because there are a billion and a half Muslims. Sure, you can find small sects of others here and they by way of defending it, and you can find the behavior of people who are not motivated by religion, but the fact remains that women are considered lesser beings by Islam, as is in such copious evidence both through the behavior of Muslim men and the facts of Islamic law.

For whatever non liberal reason you have chosen, you simply defend Islam rather than critique it rationally.

I have been critiquing

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing is not religious. It crosses all societies. It is particularly

Your calling it a choice knowing that it isn't is exactly the same as the slavery advocates of the 19th century using the model of the content house slave to justify the continuation of slavery.

Have you considered embracing liberalism, instead?

So Orthodox Jewish women who choose to wear head coverings don't do it by choice? Amish women who choose to wear plain clothes and hair coverings don't do it by choice? Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab don't do it by choice? They are all "slaves"?

Do Jewish and Amish men throw acid in the faces of those who do not cover? Do they cut their mouths into a smiley? Do they kill them and call it "honor"?

Acid throwing crosses all religions and societies. Did you you know that? In fact it is particularly prevalent in India among the Hindu majority. Why do you give them a free pass and only attack Muslims for it?

Equally important....there are many ways in which misogynistic cultures can attack women...is the only one that matters acid throwing? Or is it that it is necessary to move the goalposts in order to make it possible to single out Islam as an entire faith rather than a collection of cultures some of whom have a lot in common with other misogynistic cultures? Think about it....

Here is some information on acid attacks that may surprise you....
Acid throwing - Wikipedia

Do Amish and Jewish people do it? Can’t find anything specific on Amish and acid but I can find other disturbing material typical related to the abuse of women in their societies.

Pennsylvania rape case of Amish girl 'gifted' to man
Survivor Speaks Out Against Amish Rape Culture Ahead Of Sentencing | HuffPost

And among the more conservative Jewish communities.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/one-in-four-jewish-women-suffer-abuse-in-the-home-1.21790
In Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, abused women are finding a way out
Woman in Beit Shemesh attacked by ultra-Orthodox extremists
Mishmeret Tzniyut - Wikipedia

This leads to two questions...
If you call the hijab a symbol of oppression, why not the distinctive clothing of Amish women or the distinctive head scarves or orthodox Jewish women?

Why are those criticizing feminists for ignoring abuse in Muslim communities ignoring the same abuse in non Muslim communities?

Why don't you find me a thread where people defended these practices using the same tu quoque fallacies as you are using here? I doubt if you even know what that is, but a tu quoque fallacy is essentially "well, they do it TOO" offered as a way to distract away from the central discussion and justify the behavior in question.

I am well aware of "tu quoque" fallacy. I am also aware of how it can be used to shut down discussion.

For example, you are attempting to make the case that Islam - as a ENTIRE faith - is uniquely misogynistic - enough so that elements, such as the hijab should be considered oppression. I'm not sure about you but others who support your arguments have even called for it to be banned.

If someone points out that...no...it isn't "unique" by any means and that it is often CULTURE not religion that leads to these abuses - and takes each of your arguments apart, you claim "tu quoque".

If opposition to misogyny and the ending of cultural and religious practices that abuse women - why do people focus only on Islam? To the point where they take cultural practices in other countries and imply that Muslims in America are just as bad just as misogynistic.

I have yet to see a thread or post decrying excesses elsewhere yet they are there. In my opinion, people who TRULY care, who truly want to better things for women focus on it everywhere: they neither excuse it when it occurs in Islamic countries nor ignore it when it occurs in non-Islamic countries. Child marriages, forced marriages, lack of education for girls, acid attacks, rape, domestic abuse - these are HUGE problems. Whether it's occuring in Afghanistan where Muslim girls are shot for trying to get an education, or India where low caste women are routinely raped as a male "right" and recieve little to no justice or countries in Africa where women undergo FGM or are left alone in "menstral huts" to fend for themselves.

Where is the attention? I can tell you I've started threads on it...and little attention is paid unless it's Islamic.

Misogyny is hardwired into the very fabric of Islam, where Islamic jurisprudence treats women as lesser beings. There is just no getting around that no matter how many times you resort to these fallacious ruses in order to defend it.

Right here is a fallacy. It's called a "strawman" fallacy and you use it often. Are you familiar with it? It means, essentially, that you accuse your opponent of an argument they are not actually making.

Defending religious freedom is not defending misogyny.
Pointing out that these world religions VARY in how people choose to follow them is not defending misogyny.
It is providing facts and that seems to be problematic for some.

If misogyny is hardwired into Islam...then why is it so many Muslims in this country and around the world are not misogynists? Obviously there is a way around it. Jews figured it out. Christians figured it out. Hindus are working on it. So are Muslims.

The subject matter here is the way the left defends Islam despite its absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women. It is an important issue because it is so prevalent, and because there are a billion and a half Muslims. Sure, you can find small sects of others here and they by way of defending it, and you can find the behavior of people who are not motivated by religion, but the fact remains that women are considered lesser beings by Islam, as is in such copious evidence both through the behavior of Muslim men and the facts of Islamic law.

Point out ONE post where I or for that matter leftists in general have defended mistreatment of women?

Is defending the right of a woman to choose to wear a hijab defending an "absolutely monstrous legacy of mistreatment of women"...seriously?

For whatever non liberal reason you have chosen, you simply defend Islam rather than critique it rationally.

Nope I have no problem critiquing it. I've been critical of how extremists seek to prevent the education of girls, very critical of FGM, child marriages, domestic abuse.

But the difference between you and I is this - I don't restrict it to just Islam alone and I refuse to broad brush an entire world faith with the excesses of some - whether it's Islam, Judaism, Islam or Hinduism.

Who do you think is fighting to end FGM? Underage marriages? It's Muslims themselves.

For your reference:
Straw Man: This move oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument.[/QUOTE]


Not only do you not know what a tu quote fallacy is, you do not recognize a straw man, either.

You indulge in tu quoque fallacies every time the subject is Islam, but demand people stay on topic if the subject is another ideology, and you call a simple statement of fact a straw man.

Misogyny IS hard wired into Islam. Women are given the short end of the stick by Islamic law.

You cannot argue facts, so you indulge in these ruses.

 

[Coyote]

Mostly bigotry

There you have it, folks. Support the systematic oppression of women born into Islamic culture or you will call them a bigot. Good grief, what has happened to the left to explain how we have gone from the liberalism of the 60s and 70s to THIS.

That's what you and I have been talking about. That kind of liberalism (and it goes back to the formation of the country) is gone, expired, poof.
.

Mac. How is supporting freedom of religion in this country supporting systematic oppression?

That's the key question here.

Either you support freedom of religion, under the laws of this country, and the right of people including women to choose - or you don't.

You can't just say it's ok for some - for the Christians, for the Jews, for the Amish - but not for Muslims.

Supporting it doesn't mean you agree with the faiths - in fact, I have problems the role of women in all of them some are more dictatorial and conservative then others, but all have various different ways of observing the rules of their faith whether Muslim or Christian.

Either people are free to observe their faith - regardless of our personal feelings about that faith - or they are not. And in too many parts of the world, including many Islamic majority countries - that freedom does not exist. Let's not allow that attitude to grow here.

 

[JoeB131]

You rant like a maniac about the "Zionist entity" while attacking others as "bigots", "Islamophobes" and "Useful idiots".

I know it hurts your sensibilities, but I refuse to call the apartheid state in the Levant anything but the "Zionist Entity".

It's a good thing you have the powers that be on your side, and it must give you confidence knowing that all rules in this sub forum are filtered through extreme left ideology. Heck, otherwise that might look like a personal attack.

Meh, buddy, you've been throwing more elbows than you've received here... and gotten away with it.

You know what they say -- all animals are free, but some are more free than others.

Or you are just complaining because you don't have counterarguments.

The point is, you want to signal out Islam for bad behavior that exists in all cultures... when the bad behavior was never the point.

You guys wouldn't give a flip about those Muslims ladies wearing Hijabs if they weren't standing on land with lots of oil underneath it.

 

[Mac1958]

Mostly bigotry

There you have it, folks. Support the systematic oppression of women born into Islamic culture or you will call them a bigot. Good grief, what has happened to the left to explain how we have gone from the liberalism of the 60s and 70s to THIS.

That's what you and I have been talking about. That kind of liberalism (and it goes back to the formation of the country) is gone, expired, poof.
.

Mac. How is supporting freedom of religion in this country supporting systematic oppression?

That's the key question here.

Either you support freedom of religion, under the laws of this country, and the right of people including women to choose - or you don't.

You can't just say it's ok for some - for the Christians, for the Jews, for the Amish - but not for Muslims.

Supporting it doesn't mean you agree with the faiths - in fact, I have problems the role of women in all of them some are more dictatorial and conservative then others, but all have various different ways of observing the rules of their faith whether Muslim or Christian.

Either people are free to observe their faith - regardless of our personal feelings about that faith - or they are not. And in too many parts of the world, including many Islamic majority countries - that freedom does not exist. Let's not allow that attitude to grow here.

The Regressive Left attacks, insults, mocks, demeans and belittles Christians constantly.

The Regressive Left aggressively works to remove all things Christian from the public square.

But when it's about Islam, well, they suddenly become open-minded and oh-so-religiously-tolerant little creatures.

If we can't agree on that, there's nowhere else to go with this. And there are plenty of real liberals who agree with me.
.

 

[JoeB131]

The Regressive Left attacks, insults, mocks, demeans and belittles Christians constantly.

Uh, no, we'd be totally in support of Christianity, if Fundies actually started practicing it.

The Regressive Left aggressively works to remove all things Christian from the public square.

Um, yeah, we don't want your fairy tales in our public spaces. We also don't put Islamic things in the Public Square. Of course, that's easier because they take the "no graven images" thing seriously.

But when it's about Islam, well, they suddenly become open-minded and oh-so-religiously-tolerant little creatures.

No, we just recognize it's OUR POLICIES THAT ARE THE PROBLEM, not THEIR RELIGION.

If we can't agree on that, there's nowhere else to go with this. And there are plenty of real liberals who agree with me.

You mean Islamophobes and self-hating Muslims? Yes, you have them supporting you.

 

[Coyote]

Not only do you not know what a tu quote fallacy is, you do not recognize a straw man, either.

You indulge in tu quoque fallacies every time the subject is Islam, but demand people stay on topic if the subject is another ideology, and you call a simple statement of fact a straw man.

Misogyny IS hard wired into Islam. Women are given the short end of the stick by Islamic law.

You cannot argue facts, so you indulge in these ruses.

I fully recognize a Tu quoque fallacy and I am very familiar with Strawman as well since it is a common tactic here.

With every argument I make, I try to support it with facts.

Islamic law is surprisingly similar to Jewish law (no surprise since that is where much of it came from). When it exists in a society where it is not part of the secular law, there isn't a problem. In countries where it is part of the legal system it is much more of a problem. Also...like Jewish law, it is very complicated. Unfortunately it's application and interpretation is not straightforward nor standardized nor does it necessarily require any sort of certification to become an expert.

If the Jewish people can create a workaround for Jewish law to coexist with secular law...I see no problem for the same in Islam. In fact - it has in this country and in others. And that is a fact that you ignore. Why not support and argue for a modernization of Islam which is way overdue instead of a broadbrush demonization?

 

[Coyote]

Mostly bigotry

There you have it, folks. Support the systematic oppression of women born into Islamic culture or you will call them a bigot. Good grief, what has happened to the left to explain how we have gone from the liberalism of the 60s and 70s to THIS.

That's what you and I have been talking about. That kind of liberalism (and it goes back to the formation of the country) is gone, expired, poof.
.

Mac. How is supporting freedom of religion in this country supporting systematic oppression?

That's the key question here.

Either you support freedom of religion, under the laws of this country, and the right of people including women to choose - or you don't.

You can't just say it's ok for some - for the Christians, for the Jews, for the Amish - but not for Muslims.

Supporting it doesn't mean you agree with the faiths - in fact, I have problems the role of women in all of them some are more dictatorial and conservative then others, but all have various different ways of observing the rules of their faith whether Muslim or Christian.

Either people are free to observe their faith - regardless of our personal feelings about that faith - or they are not. And in too many parts of the world, including many Islamic majority countries - that freedom does not exist. Let's not allow that attitude to grow here.

The Regressive Left attacks, insults, mocks, demeans and belittles Christians constantly.

The Regressive Left aggressively works to remove all things Christian from the public square.

But when it's about Islam, well, they suddenly become open-minded and oh-so-religiously-tolerant little creatures.

If we can't agree on that, there's nowhere else to go with this. And there are plenty of real liberals who agree with me.
.

Well Mac...I see many threads here that attack, insult, mock and demonize Islam as a whole. What are those people labeled?

And yes - I do agree with you on the first two lines I bolded. People go to ridiculous extremes to exclude Christianity from the public sphere and I agree it goes to far. People on the left need to be more tolerant and accepting of others in this regard. It's not like they are threatened or having it shoved down their throat by a simple Christmas pagent or singing Christian Christmas carols in school.

 

[Coyote]

The Regressive Left attacks, insults, mocks, demeans and belittles Christians constantly.

Uh, no, we'd be totally in support of Christianity, if Fundies actually started practicing it.

But right here Joe...you are making Mac's point for him.

Demeaning them as "Fundies" .

 

[Mac1958]

Mostly bigotry

There you have it, folks. Support the systematic oppression of women born into Islamic culture or you will call them a bigot. Good grief, what has happened to the left to explain how we have gone from the liberalism of the 60s and 70s to THIS.

That's what you and I have been talking about. That kind of liberalism (and it goes back to the formation of the country) is gone, expired, poof.
.

Mac. How is supporting freedom of religion in this country supporting systematic oppression?

That's the key question here.

Either you support freedom of religion, under the laws of this country, and the right of people including women to choose - or you don't.

You can't just say it's ok for some - for the Christians, for the Jews, for the Amish - but not for Muslims.

Supporting it doesn't mean you agree with the faiths - in fact, I have problems the role of women in all of them some are more dictatorial and conservative then others, but all have various different ways of observing the rules of their faith whether Muslim or Christian.

Either people are free to observe their faith - regardless of our personal feelings about that faith - or they are not. And in too many parts of the world, including many Islamic majority countries - that freedom does not exist. Let's not allow that attitude to grow here.

The Regressive Left attacks, insults, mocks, demeans and belittles Christians constantly.

The Regressive Left aggressively works to remove all things Christian from the public square.

But when it's about Islam, well, they suddenly become open-minded and oh-so-religiously-tolerant little creatures.

If we can't agree on that, there's nowhere else to go with this. And there are plenty of real liberals who agree with me.
.

Well Mac...I see many threads here that attack, insult, mock and demonize Islam as a whole. What are those people labeled?

And yes - I do agree with you on the first two lines I bolded. People go to ridiculous extremes to exclude Christianity from the public sphere and I agree it goes to far. People on the left need to be more tolerant and accepting of others in this regard. It's not like they are threatened or having it shoved down their throat by a simple Christmas pagent or singing Christian Christmas carols in school.

Anyone who attacks and insults Islam out of hand and as a whole, is just the right wing version of the Regressive Left. As I point out all the time, the two ends of the spectrum are very, very similar in their behaviors. The wingers are the problem, not the solution.

It's the spinning and deflecting and lying and hypocrisy of the Regressives, in favor of the world's most regressive religion, including on this thread, that I'm talking about.
.

 

[Mac1958]

The Regressive Left attacks, insults, mocks, demeans and belittles Christians constantly.

Uh, no, we'd be totally in support of Christianity, if Fundies actually started practicing it.

But right here Joe...you are making Mac's point for him.

Demeaning them as "Fundies" .

He won't see it. He illustrates my points for me pretty much every day.
.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The Left Wingers have proven over and over that they will choose political power over principles every-time.
They want Muslim votes.

 

[Coyote]

There you have it, folks. Support the systematic oppression of women born into Islamic culture or you will call them a bigot. Good grief, what has happened to the left to explain how we have gone from the liberalism of the 60s and 70s to THIS.

That's what you and I have been talking about. That kind of liberalism (and it goes back to the formation of the country) is gone, expired, poof.
.

Mac. How is supporting freedom of religion in this country supporting systematic oppression?

That's the key question here.

Either you support freedom of religion, under the laws of this country, and the right of people including women to choose - or you don't.

You can't just say it's ok for some - for the Christians, for the Jews, for the Amish - but not for Muslims.

Supporting it doesn't mean you agree with the faiths - in fact, I have problems the role of women in all of them some are more dictatorial and conservative then others, but all have various different ways of observing the rules of their faith whether Muslim or Christian.

Either people are free to observe their faith - regardless of our personal feelings about that faith - or they are not. And in too many parts of the world, including many Islamic majority countries - that freedom does not exist. Let's not allow that attitude to grow here.

The Regressive Left attacks, insults, mocks, demeans and belittles Christians constantly.

The Regressive Left aggressively works to remove all things Christian from the public square.

But when it's about Islam, well, they suddenly become open-minded and oh-so-religiously-tolerant little creatures.

If we can't agree on that, there's nowhere else to go with this. And there are plenty of real liberals who agree with me.
.

Well Mac...I see many threads here that attack, insult, mock and demonize Islam as a whole. What are those people labeled?

And yes - I do agree with you on the first two lines I bolded. People go to ridiculous extremes to exclude Christianity from the public sphere and I agree it goes to far. People on the left need to be more tolerant and accepting of others in this regard. It's not like they are threatened or having it shoved down their throat by a simple Christmas pagent or singing Christian Christmas carols in school.

Anyone who attacks and insults Islam out of hand and as a whole, is just the right wing version of the Regressive Left. As I point out all the time, the two ends of the spectrum are very, very similar in their behaviors. The wingers are the problem, not the solution.

It's the spinning and deflecting and lying and hypocrisy of the Regressives, including on this thread, that I'm talking about.
.

Then we agree more then we don't. I see many examples of both extremes on this thread.

And it is why I think instead of fighting against religions as a whole, we should be fighting against actions - against cultural beliefs that prevent little girls from getting an education to the point of violence, that perpetrate child marriages or that view rape against women as somehow the woman's fault, and that she is ruined for marriage and dishonors her family or that cut up a woman's genitals.

 

[JoeB131]

But right here Joe...you are making Mac's point for him.

Demeaning them as "Fundies"

I think they gave up the right to be called "Christians" when they all got behind Trump in his "kitty" grabbing glory.

I kind of thought they were hypocrites when they got behind Mitt Romney even though they had all called Mormonism a weird Cult, but they really amped it up when they got behind a thrice married, porn-starring, misogynist.

Here's the thing, I don't believe in God, and I don't think Jesus ever existed, but the philosophy isn't that bad. Treat others the way you'd want to be treated. Help the less fortunate. Etc.

 

[JoeB131]

He won't see it.

No, you see, I guess when I see Fundies ranting about abortion and gay marriage, NEITHER OF WHICH JESUS EVER TALKED ABOUT, I can't take them seriously...

 

[OldLady]

Hijabs are not their problem

Hijabs are a symbol, and everyone knows it. We can ignore that, or we can just admit it.
.

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

 

[Mac1958]

Hijabs are not their problem

Hijabs are a symbol, and everyone knows it. We can ignore that, or we can just admit it.

A lot of women don't feel decent or dressed without their hijab. Not everyone sees it as a sign of "control." Feminists in this country ARE concerned about women's rights globally and there are a lot of women active on that front. However, I believe the OP is using the hijab as one more opportunity to slam Islam as evil, rather than as a heartfelt concern about women's rights.

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.
.

 

[JoeB131]

There are exceptions to everything, but I think the OP is just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy shown by many on the Left in favor of the world's most regressive religion.

There's nothing to complain about if an item of clothing is being worn purely as a matter of choice.

I think if the worst thing you have to complain about is a fashion choice, you are just looking for things to complain about.